Thursday, 10 February 2022

Responses

Ms SYMES (Northern Victoria—Leader of the Government, Attorney-General, Minister for Emergency Services) (22:31): Tonight we had 10 adjournment matters. I will pass eight of them on to the relevant ministers, and I would like to make some comments in relation to Mr Rich-Phillips’s adjournment matter and also Mrs McArthur’s.

I might start with Mrs McArthur’s. Of course I will pass that on to the Minister for Agriculture, but I did just want to make the point that some of your comments I need to respond to. Public sector workers are employed by department heads—not ministers, not members of the Labor Party—and they are merit based. I personally have worked with several former Liberal ministerial advisers, including the chief of staff to the former Premier, who work in very high positions in the Victorian public sector and are really good at their jobs, and I think it is very unfair to cast aspersions on highly qualified people because they may have worked somewhere previously.

In relation to your comments regarding not pursuing legal costs, all government offices and agencies have to follow model litigant guidelines. Decisions such as that would be made by the VicForests board. And as for your point that these decisions would be made for political purposes, I can point out that most recently in another situation of a failed hotel quarantine legal action case we decided not to pursue legal costs against those applicants. Decisions are made for appropriate reasons, not political reasons, and it is not uncommon to not pursue costs in certain matters. You have raised issues for the minister and I will be happy to pass them on, because she will be more across the detail, but I just wanted to make those points.

Ms Lovell, I was just a little bit concerned about your matter going to the Minister for Regional Development. I think it is probably more appropriate for the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events, but I do not know. You might get an answer that just says, ‘It’s not for me’. That would be my guess.

Ms Lovell: The reason I referred it to regional development is that it is a sports and events centre, and most of those larger projects are funded out of regional development. But I am happy for you to send it to the minister for sport.

Ms SYMES: In my experience it would be sport.

Ms Lovell: Okay. Well, can we redirect it to the minister for sport then?

Ms SYMES: Yes, I think that would be good. Let us do that, and that is on me if it should be for regional development. But that would be I think more appropriate.

Mr Rich-Phillips, that was awful—a really heartbreaking story from your constituent. Obviously it is difficult to comment on individual cases. Bail for children can be decided by a bail justice, the police themselves or in certain cases, depending on the defence, court. If it is denied by police or a bail justice, then it has to go to court for a decision. I can give your constituent more information on bail, conditions of bail, breaches of bail and how that works, but what I was more concerned about in the issue that you raised was the hurdles that your constituent’s son is facing in pursuing this matter. And I was hoping, if I could get a bit more detail, that I could provide some clearer advice on perhaps some victim support services or even some court advice in relation to that matter. Those privacy concerns affected me, and I would really like to look more closely at that matter if that is okay.

The PRESIDENT: On that basis, the house stands adjourned.

House adjourned 10.35 pm until Tuesday, 22 February.